Quote:It remains one of the enduring images of NBA lore – Joe Dumars guarding a determined young Michael Jordan in the 1990 Eastern Conference playoffs.

Dumars of the “Bad Boy” Detroit Pistons, the league’s two-time defending champs, looked like a gaucho corralling the ultimate toro, his feet moving furiously (maybe the best defensive slide in the history of the game), one forearm firmly barred into Jordan to keep contact, the other bent arm thrust into the air, giving Dumars his only hope of keeping his balance while trying to ride the Jordan whirlwind.

Jerry West watched the performance and remarked privately that most people considered Isiah Thomas the Pistons’ superstar, but West pointed out that it was Dumars who was the supreme talent.

Why?

Well, West said, both Thomas and Dumars could push the envelope offensively, “but Joe’s defense sets him apart.”

Just how good was that defense?

It left a supremely disappointed Jordan sobbing at the back of the team bus when the series was over (it’s also probably the only NBA defense ever to spawn a best-selling book: Sam Smith’s ‘The Jordan Rules’).

Today Dumars is the chief basketball executive of the team he once led as a player. He’s an honest man, which means he chooses his words carefully.

Asked in July if he could defend Jordan under today’s interpretation of the rules, Dumars first laughed, then offered a long pause before replying, “It would have been virtually impossible to defend Michael Jordan based on the way the game’s being called right now.”

Quote:THE NEW WAY

Just how is the game being called these days?

New Jersey Nets executive Rod Thorn, a longtime expert on NBA rules, acknowledges that last season the league adopted a dramatic shift in how it interpreted the rules of the game.

No longer would a defensive player on the perimeter be allowed to use his hand, a barred arm or any sort of physical contact to impede or block the movement of either a cutter or a ball handler.

In a recent interview, Thorn said that the NBA had changed the rule to give an advantage to the offensive player.

“It’s more difficult now to guard the quick wing player who can handle the ball,” Thorn said of the change. “I think it helps skilled players over someone who just has strength or toughness. What the NBA is trying to do is promote unimpeded movement for dribblers or cutters.”

Quote:Tex Winter, now 84 and the veteran of more than a half century of coaching, has serious misgivings about what the league has done.

Winter acknowledges the outgrowth of the new rules interpretation is the rise of the super dominant offensive player, led by Wade’s performance in the NBA Finals and Bryant’s string of 40-, 50, even 60-point games during the regular season.

“They should be protected, but not that much,” Winter said of the current generation of talented offensive players. “I don’t think that just touching a player should be a foul.”

Quote:A big issue for Winter’s Lakers is how the guards will play defensively. Traditionally, Phil Jackson’s teams have featured lots of ball pressure. That means the Lakers’ pressure style has to shift.

“I think you have to play more of a containing defense,” explained Winter. “You can still put some pressure on the offense. You can contain them and slow the ball up.”

But the new guidelines “change how you force turnovers,” Winter explained. “You can’t be as aggressive as you’d like to be with your hands. You can’t be ‘into’ the guy as much.”

As a result, defense now becomes a matter of waiting for the offensive player to make a mistake, rather than forcing a turnover, Winter said.

The Lakers would like to exert the kind of ball pressure they used to deploy when Derek Fisher wore the Forum Blue and Gold.

But the new guidelines are still murky, Winter said.

Before games, officials have visited with teams to explain the new approach, Winter said.

“They come in and tell us all this stuff. Then the first four or five plays of the game, you see them doing just the opposite from what they said. You don’t know what they’re going to call. So you have to adjust accordingly, depending what’s going on from game to game, even half to half.”

Yes, the skills based approach to practice is news to me. I hadn't heard that before. That's too bad, because I agree with Lazenby that he was innovating on the floor in good ways overall.

Good ways overall? But the team was in a bad bad losing streak. He was losing his team.

Does MDA preach skills or motion? Seeing Westbrook have a monster year, MVP type year with crazy stats, OKC a good team and won 47 games. Not bad (from where we stand) but not great. Are rockets that much better or do they play within a structure that promotes Hardens skill?SAS has Kwahi, might be a better player but he is not off the "Pop leash" and they won 61 games. Obviously not a direct comparison but my point is team vs individual.

This is really interesting stuff and explains why NBA games don't feature the ball movement or great "teams". We have great talents??? GSW has the greatest talents which plays a free flowing game. While all teams play in some structure, some more than others.

I know your on a quest to discredit Phil at every chance you can, but this is interesting stuff. Does it change anything for you? Or aspects of preconceived notions?

Knicks1248:
1. Dolan should be more involved! 2. Why would any knick fan want pick 8, when that spot has a history of producing marginal NBA taken. (He prefers pick 9th instead)

Yes, the skills based approach to practice is news to me. I hadn't heard that before. That's too bad, because I agree with Lazenby that he was innovating on the floor in good ways overall.

Good ways overall? But the team was in a bad bad losing streak. He was losing his team.

Does MDA preach skills or motion? Seeing Westbrook have a monster year, MVP type year with crazy stats, OKC a good team and won 47 games. Not bad (from where we stand) but not great. Are rockets that much better or do they play within a structure that promotes Hardens skill?SAS has Kwahi, might be a better player but he is not off the "Pop leash" and they won 61 games. Obviously not a direct comparison but my point is team vs individual.

This is really interesting stuff and explains why NBA games don't feature the ball movement or great "teams". We have great talents??? GSW has the greatest talents which plays a free flowing game. While all teams play in some structure, some more than others.

I know your on a quest to discredit Phil at every chance you can, but this is interesting stuff. Does it change anything for you? Or aspects of preconceived notions?

I think it is interesting. I didn't post this to discredit Phil. I think this is interesting stuff and it does help give a fuller picture. I did not realize the skills based practice aspect. I can see why that'd annoy Phil... but at the same time I think Fisher was doing a good job. Hard to say he lost the team when Calderon, Lance, and Melo all were in and out with injuries when the losing streak hit. They were overachieving a bit at 22-22, KP hit a bit of a wall, some injuries started mounting... Fisher's Barnes story didn't help for sure.

One question - and again this isn't to discredit Phil, just a question - at some point are you on an impossible quest if you're out to prove that team ball and the way the league used to be is better, if it leads to you ignoring or resisting what works in the new way the league is set up? I don't know the answer, but I do think that has led to some of Phil's struggles.

Anyway, it's all interesting. I got more insight into the state of the Knicks from those tweets than from a thousand Charley Rosen or Frank Isola articles, that's for sure.

Interestingly after the press conference I thought it would be good to read Phil's books...I think he might be an interesting character from a coaching aspect..I got to see particularly his strong belief system on what works in a different way...This is probably killing him, the lack of success..I did however see he isn't a leader of an organization to build from the ground up..He is a coach first and foremost like Larry Brown...They want the game played a certain way and is hell bent to see it that way...

Yes, the skills based approach to practice is news to me. I hadn't heard that before. That's too bad, because I agree with Lazenby that he was innovating on the floor in good ways overall.

Good ways overall? But the team was in a bad bad losing streak. He was losing his team.

Does MDA preach skills or motion? Seeing Westbrook have a monster year, MVP type year with crazy stats, OKC a good team and won 47 games. Not bad (from where we stand) but not great. Are rockets that much better or do they play within a structure that promotes Hardens skill?SAS has Kwahi, might be a better player but he is not off the "Pop leash" and they won 61 games. Obviously not a direct comparison but my point is team vs individual.

This is really interesting stuff and explains why NBA games don't feature the ball movement or great "teams". We have great talents??? GSW has the greatest talents which plays a free flowing game. While all teams play in some structure, some more than others.

I know your on a quest to discredit Phil at every chance you can, but this is interesting stuff. Does it change anything for you? Or aspects of preconceived notions?

I think it is interesting. I didn't post this to discredit Phil. I think this is interesting stuff and it does help give a fuller picture. I did not realize the skills based practice aspect. I can see why that'd annoy Phil... but at the same time I think Fisher was doing a good job. Hard to say he lost the team when Calderon, Lance, and Melo all were in and out with injuries when the losing streak hit. They were overachieving a bit at 22-22, KP hit a bit of a wall, some injuries started mounting... Fisher's Barnes story didn't help for sure.

One question - and again this isn't to discredit Phil, just a question - at some point are you on an impossible quest if you're out to prove that team ball and the way the league used to be is better, if it leads to you ignoring or resisting what works in the new way the league is set up? I don't know the answer, but I do think that has led to some of Phil's struggles.

Anyway, it's all interesting. I got more insight into the state of the Knicks from those tweets than from a thousand Charley Rosen or Frank Isola articles, that's for sure.

I appreciate the sentiment but it doesn't really seem like you want to take a balanced approach with a neutral eye. Look at your own words: "if your' out to prove that team ball and the way the league used to be".

League used to be? team ball is a thing of the past? What the heck are GS and SA doing? They both have systems and team ball.

I didn't realize Phil was trying to only play as if it were the 70s or 80s or 90s.

Phil is trying to implement a system. Has said it from the beginning. Has said that he doesn't really care about what system but obviously prefers what has worked and what he is familiar with. The basics of that are player and ball movement, spacing.

If you really want to take the tact of not trying to discredit, best you not do so in the next part of the sentence.

I think the Phil/Jeff relationship is on the right track. The way Jeff adjusted the offense and defense pleased Phil and he was VERY complementary during his Press Conference. Phil has accepted the Triangle Tweaks that Jeff has made and the lines of communication are good. Phil also mentioned using more pressure D and I noted that Jeff did in fact have the team doing that more to close the season.

I know many will not accept what I'm saying but I know that these things are accurate and the evidence is all on tape. I can back up my claims with proof as well as Phil's own comments. I see things getting better from here. It's already Starting despite the KP thing which is unfortunate.

When the Prez, GM, Coaches and players are getting on the same page that's a good thing. That's what we saw in the closing games of the season. That's why I've said KP was on some other stuff and it's not necessarily representative of where the team is headed. He'll come around.

Yes, the skills based approach to practice is news to me. I hadn't heard that before. That's too bad, because I agree with Lazenby that he was innovating on the floor in good ways overall.

Good ways overall? But the team was in a bad bad losing streak. He was losing his team.

Does MDA preach skills or motion? Seeing Westbrook have a monster year, MVP type year with crazy stats, OKC a good team and won 47 games. Not bad (from where we stand) but not great. Are rockets that much better or do they play within a structure that promotes Hardens skill?SAS has Kwahi, might be a better player but he is not off the "Pop leash" and they won 61 games. Obviously not a direct comparison but my point is team vs individual.

This is really interesting stuff and explains why NBA games don't feature the ball movement or great "teams". We have great talents??? GSW has the greatest talents which plays a free flowing game. While all teams play in some structure, some more than others.

I know your on a quest to discredit Phil at every chance you can, but this is interesting stuff. Does it change anything for you? Or aspects of preconceived notions?

I think it is interesting. I didn't post this to discredit Phil. I think this is interesting stuff and it does help give a fuller picture. I did not realize the skills based practice aspect. I can see why that'd annoy Phil... but at the same time I think Fisher was doing a good job. Hard to say he lost the team when Calderon, Lance, and Melo all were in and out with injuries when the losing streak hit. They were overachieving a bit at 22-22, KP hit a bit of a wall, some injuries started mounting... Fisher's Barnes story didn't help for sure.

One question - and again this isn't to discredit Phil, just a question - at some point are you on an impossible quest if you're out to prove that team ball and the way the league used to be is better, if it leads to you ignoring or resisting what works in the new way the league is set up? I don't know the answer, but I do think that has led to some of Phil's struggles.

Anyway, it's all interesting. I got more insight into the state of the Knicks from those tweets than from a thousand Charley Rosen or Frank Isola articles, that's for sure.

I think that is the main reason Phil took the job...to prove that team ball and defense...trumps the 3 ball.....Melo never bought in....and if the captain of the ship is not onboard, none of the crew will be as well.

Yes, the skills based approach to practice is news to me. I hadn't heard that before. That's too bad, because I agree with Lazenby that he was innovating on the floor in good ways overall.

Good ways overall? But the team was in a bad bad losing streak. He was losing his team.

Does MDA preach skills or motion? Seeing Westbrook have a monster year, MVP type year with crazy stats, OKC a good team and won 47 games. Not bad (from where we stand) but not great. Are rockets that much better or do they play within a structure that promotes Hardens skill?SAS has Kwahi, might be a better player but he is not off the "Pop leash" and they won 61 games. Obviously not a direct comparison but my point is team vs individual.

This is really interesting stuff and explains why NBA games don't feature the ball movement or great "teams". We have great talents??? GSW has the greatest talents which plays a free flowing game. While all teams play in some structure, some more than others.

I know your on a quest to discredit Phil at every chance you can, but this is interesting stuff. Does it change anything for you? Or aspects of preconceived notions?

I think it is interesting. I didn't post this to discredit Phil. I think this is interesting stuff and it does help give a fuller picture. I did not realize the skills based practice aspect. I can see why that'd annoy Phil... but at the same time I think Fisher was doing a good job. Hard to say he lost the team when Calderon, Lance, and Melo all were in and out with injuries when the losing streak hit. They were overachieving a bit at 22-22, KP hit a bit of a wall, some injuries started mounting... Fisher's Barnes story didn't help for sure.

One question - and again this isn't to discredit Phil, just a question - at some point are you on an impossible quest if you're out to prove that team ball and the way the league used to be is better, if it leads to you ignoring or resisting what works in the new way the league is set up? I don't know the answer, but I do think that has led to some of Phil's struggles.

Anyway, it's all interesting. I got more insight into the state of the Knicks from those tweets than from a thousand Charley Rosen or Frank Isola articles, that's for sure.

Yes, better than just Isola bashing or Rosen enabling!!

This new form is basically promoting "Stars" from individual talent. We watch Westbook one man wrecking crew and phenom celebrated achievements vs. 47 win team. Perhaps team ball does not promote this kind of stardom and if not, it thwarts paydays for some types of players. Maybe Thibs is screaming his head off to for Wiggins to play defense and yet Wiggins agent is telling him "You don't hang big numbers, you not gonna make big money". Not every cat is built like that, Kwahi seems to not be chasing that. Good kid, good fit for the spurs, it all worked there nice. Manu is awesome thru his career for moving without the ball. It got him rich too!!In NY we got melo pushing back and quoted as saying adhering to team is "Sacrificing my game some".......as if he is somehow losing something? To quote a Tex winter as recently posted that phils greatest achievement was selling Jordan on the triangle and it turned him into a winner and mega sponser, the greatest ever!! Kobe pushed back harder as he wanted to win and fulfill his own agenda at times. He cost Lakers at least one chip by not buying in. Kobe would in some years not feel the team was good enough and he had to fill that void. Cavs are a nice collection of talent playing a high skill game. Perhaps David Blatt who was hired to coach a team without LeBron was more into the ball movement thing rather than letting his players rock and roll.

I like the idea of a culture like SAS where ball movement and a system is built. At the same time players want to be payed and not be interchangeable. Maybe what knicks were asking Shump to do was detrimental to his market value where a player at the end of his career is more inclined to still be payed market value, but know he won't have some stats in a team concept. Kind of what Iggy did going to GSW. "Be a glue guy, feed the shooters, and you will also have chances to score when the ball comes back, but you'll also get paid well to not worry about your shots".

The question looms: Does defense still win chips? Does ball movement trump individual skill? Do you follow the trend because of the talent you have, or get the talent to play winning team ball? Does the market need to promote stars? Or can the team be the star? NFL promotes its teams. NHL has few stars and promotes its teams. Baseball is far more metric oriented with less dependence on chemistry. We go to see a player or a team?

I guess when teams is winning, few yell for Steph Curry to "Pass the damn ball!!". When Melo is doing his thing, we yell, but sit down smiling when he makes the shot. when missing, we get grumpy quick.I suppose many ways to win than just one. Out west we have the two best teams in Spurs and Warriors. Warriors got Durant puts them over the top but I suppose I'll root for Spurs and team ball. Im old school that way.

Knicks1248:
1. Dolan should be more involved! 2. Why would any knick fan want pick 8, when that spot has a history of producing marginal NBA taken. (He prefers pick 9th instead)

wargames wrote:That makes sense. Fisher came in with about 3 Thunder assistant coaches

In the end Durant went to a "team". He had the money, had his "Own" team, the endorsements and money, but lacked not just a chip, but the attraction of being with a group of guys all going for the same thing. He held Westbrook back. Also, Westbrook got it all now. He has "his" team, the money will come flying in soon, and he'll get all the max money. Then he will want a chip!!Not all players are wired the same.

Hard to not bring contrast to Melo but this is the dude we signed and then resigned. He is a knick because knicks wanted him back. He is a knick, and "Knicks" have yet to make it work in the win column.No blame. Its on all of them.

Knicks1248:
1. Dolan should be more involved! 2. Why would any knick fan want pick 8, when that spot has a history of producing marginal NBA taken. (He prefers pick 9th instead)

Yes, the skills based approach to practice is news to me. I hadn't heard that before. That's too bad, because I agree with Lazenby that he was innovating on the floor in good ways overall.

Good ways overall? But the team was in a bad bad losing streak. He was losing his team.

Does MDA preach skills or motion? Seeing Westbrook have a monster year, MVP type year with crazy stats, OKC a good team and won 47 games. Not bad (from where we stand) but not great. Are rockets that much better or do they play within a structure that promotes Hardens skill?SAS has Kwahi, might be a better player but he is not off the "Pop leash" and they won 61 games. Obviously not a direct comparison but my point is team vs individual.

This is really interesting stuff and explains why NBA games don't feature the ball movement or great "teams". We have great talents??? GSW has the greatest talents which plays a free flowing game. While all teams play in some structure, some more than others.

I know your on a quest to discredit Phil at every chance you can, but this is interesting stuff. Does it change anything for you? Or aspects of preconceived notions?

I think it is interesting. I didn't post this to discredit Phil. I think this is interesting stuff and it does help give a fuller picture. I did not realize the skills based practice aspect. I can see why that'd annoy Phil... but at the same time I think Fisher was doing a good job. Hard to say he lost the team when Calderon, Lance, and Melo all were in and out with injuries when the losing streak hit. They were overachieving a bit at 22-22, KP hit a bit of a wall, some injuries started mounting... Fisher's Barnes story didn't help for sure.

One question - and again this isn't to discredit Phil, just a question - at some point are you on an impossible quest if you're out to prove that team ball and the way the league used to be is better, if it leads to you ignoring or resisting what works in the new way the league is set up? I don't know the answer, but I do think that has led to some of Phil's struggles.

Anyway, it's all interesting. I got more insight into the state of the Knicks from those tweets than from a thousand Charley Rosen or Frank Isola articles, that's for sure.

I appreciate the sentiment but it doesn't really seem like you want to take a balanced approach with a neutral eye. Look at your own words: "if your' out to prove that team ball and the way the league used to be".

League used to be? team ball is a thing of the past? What the heck are GS and SA doing? They both have systems and team ball.

I didn't realize Phil was trying to only play as if it were the 70s or 80s or 90s.

Phil is trying to implement a system. Has said it from the beginning. Has said that he doesn't really care about what system but obviously prefers what has worked and what he is familiar with. The basics of that are player and ball movement, spacing.

If you really want to take the tact of not trying to discredit, best you not do so in the next part of the sentence.

Yes, the skills based approach to practice is news to me. I hadn't heard that before. That's too bad, because I agree with Lazenby that he was innovating on the floor in good ways overall.

Good ways overall? But the team was in a bad bad losing streak. He was losing his team.

Does MDA preach skills or motion? Seeing Westbrook have a monster year, MVP type year with crazy stats, OKC a good team and won 47 games. Not bad (from where we stand) but not great. Are rockets that much better or do they play within a structure that promotes Hardens skill?SAS has Kwahi, might be a better player but he is not off the "Pop leash" and they won 61 games. Obviously not a direct comparison but my point is team vs individual.

This is really interesting stuff and explains why NBA games don't feature the ball movement or great "teams". We have great talents??? GSW has the greatest talents which plays a free flowing game. While all teams play in some structure, some more than others.

I know your on a quest to discredit Phil at every chance you can, but this is interesting stuff. Does it change anything for you? Or aspects of preconceived notions?

I think it is interesting. I didn't post this to discredit Phil. I think this is interesting stuff and it does help give a fuller picture. I did not realize the skills based practice aspect. I can see why that'd annoy Phil... but at the same time I think Fisher was doing a good job. Hard to say he lost the team when Calderon, Lance, and Melo all were in and out with injuries when the losing streak hit. They were overachieving a bit at 22-22, KP hit a bit of a wall, some injuries started mounting... Fisher's Barnes story didn't help for sure.

One question - and again this isn't to discredit Phil, just a question - at some point are you on an impossible quest if you're out to prove that team ball and the way the league used to be is better, if it leads to you ignoring or resisting what works in the new way the league is set up? I don't know the answer, but I do think that has led to some of Phil's struggles.

Anyway, it's all interesting. I got more insight into the state of the Knicks from those tweets than from a thousand Charley Rosen or Frank Isola articles, that's for sure.

Yes, better than just Isola bashing or Rosen enabling!!

This new form is basically promoting "Stars" from individual talent. We watch Westbook one man wrecking crew and phenom celebrated achievements vs. 47 win team. Perhaps team ball does not promote this kind of stardom and if not, it thwarts paydays for some types of players. Maybe Thibs is screaming his head off to for Wiggins to play defense and yet Wiggins agent is telling him "You don't hang big numbers, you not gonna make big money". Not every cat is built like that, Kwahi seems to not be chasing that. Good kid, good fit for the spurs, it all worked there nice. Manu is awesome thru his career for moving without the ball. It got him rich too!!In NY we got melo pushing back and quoted as saying adhering to team is "Sacrificing my game some".......as if he is somehow losing something? To quote a Tex winter as recently posted that phils greatest achievement was selling Jordan on the triangle and it turned him into a winner and mega sponser, the greatest ever!! Kobe pushed back harder as he wanted to win and fulfill his own agenda at times. He cost Lakers at least one chip by not buying in. Kobe would in some years not feel the team was good enough and he had to fill that void. Cavs are a nice collection of talent playing a high skill game. Perhaps David Blatt who was hired to coach a team without LeBron was more into the ball movement thing rather than letting his players rock and roll.

I like the idea of a culture like SAS where ball movement and a system is built. At the same time players want to be payed and not be interchangeable. Maybe what knicks were asking Shump to do was detrimental to his market value where a player at the end of his career is more inclined to still be payed market value, but know he won't have some stats in a team concept. Kind of what Iggy did going to GSW. "Be a glue guy, feed the shooters, and you will also have chances to score when the ball comes back, but you'll also get paid well to not worry about your shots".

The question looms: Does defense still win chips? Does ball movement trump individual skill? Do you follow the trend because of the talent you have, or get the talent to play winning team ball? Does the market need to promote stars? Or can the team be the star? NFL promotes its teams. NHL has few stars and promotes its teams. Baseball is far more metric oriented with less dependence on chemistry. We go to see a player or a team?

I guess when teams is winning, few yell for Steph Curry to "Pass the damn ball!!". When Melo is doing his thing, we yell, but sit down smiling when he makes the shot. when missing, we get grumpy quick.I suppose many ways to win than just one. Out west we have the two best teams in Spurs and Warriors. Warriors got Durant puts them over the top but I suppose I'll root for Spurs and team ball. Im old school that way.

I think the Warriors are a version of team ball... but they've integrated the star approach into that and tailored their system very specifically to their specific talents. Kerr has told Curry and Klay that "there are no bad shots" for them to take. Certainly not what we've heard here about KP's "cheap" three point shots. And yet, the Warriors still thrive on ball movement, cutting, passing, constant motion. It's very interesting to me what the Warriors have built.

I think they're a big favorite to win this year, but we'll see. (that said, I don't like the personalities on their team, so I wouldn't say I'm rooting for them) I would root more for the Spurs or Cavs. Can't bring myself to root for Harden's Rockets or the Celtics.

I don't see it as a philosophical struggle. I think it's clear good teams need to not only share the ball, but have a roster of two or three all-star level players to really compete for a title, as well as a strong bench. I enjoy the stylistic variations throughout the league.

I don't believe there's one overarching philosophy that wins titles - I believe style of play should be tailored to the talent you have, still team ball, but I think you build a system to suit your players. I'm not sure the Warriors could play the system they do without the very specific talents of Steph, Klay, and Draymond. I enjoy that about basketball. I think we've had a few instances of New York hiring coaches who are hell bent on installing a specific system and being inflexible. We saw it with MDA and now Phil (difference and struggle AGAIN in that Phil is NOT the coach, but it seems like he wishes he could be!). Even Larry Brown to some extent. Our best success was Woodson who looked at the talent here and invented a system on the fly and it worked. Is that the way to win a championship? Maybe not. Maybe you need these inflexible architects, hell bent on installing their vision and imposing it upon the world. I don't really know. I would say I think Popovich, while playing a team system also falls on the more - adapt it to your talent side of things. To me, that's how I'd rather play, to be honest. Pop and Kerr style. People point out Kerr played under Jackson... but he also put in plenty of time under Pop.

Yes, the skills based approach to practice is news to me. I hadn't heard that before. That's too bad, because I agree with Lazenby that he was innovating on the floor in good ways overall.

Good ways overall? But the team was in a bad bad losing streak. He was losing his team.

Does MDA preach skills or motion? Seeing Westbrook have a monster year, MVP type year with crazy stats, OKC a good team and won 47 games. Not bad (from where we stand) but not great. Are rockets that much better or do they play within a structure that promotes Hardens skill?SAS has Kwahi, might be a better player but he is not off the "Pop leash" and they won 61 games. Obviously not a direct comparison but my point is team vs individual.

This is really interesting stuff and explains why NBA games don't feature the ball movement or great "teams". We have great talents??? GSW has the greatest talents which plays a free flowing game. While all teams play in some structure, some more than others.

I know your on a quest to discredit Phil at every chance you can, but this is interesting stuff. Does it change anything for you? Or aspects of preconceived notions?

I think it is interesting. I didn't post this to discredit Phil. I think this is interesting stuff and it does help give a fuller picture. I did not realize the skills based practice aspect. I can see why that'd annoy Phil... but at the same time I think Fisher was doing a good job. Hard to say he lost the team when Calderon, Lance, and Melo all were in and out with injuries when the losing streak hit. They were overachieving a bit at 22-22, KP hit a bit of a wall, some injuries started mounting... Fisher's Barnes story didn't help for sure.

One question - and again this isn't to discredit Phil, just a question - at some point are you on an impossible quest if you're out to prove that team ball and the way the league used to be is better, if it leads to you ignoring or resisting what works in the new way the league is set up? I don't know the answer, but I do think that has led to some of Phil's struggles.

Anyway, it's all interesting. I got more insight into the state of the Knicks from those tweets than from a thousand Charley Rosen or Frank Isola articles, that's for sure.

Yes, better than just Isola bashing or Rosen enabling!!

This new form is basically promoting "Stars" from individual talent. We watch Westbook one man wrecking crew and phenom celebrated achievements vs. 47 win team. Perhaps team ball does not promote this kind of stardom and if not, it thwarts paydays for some types of players. Maybe Thibs is screaming his head off to for Wiggins to play defense and yet Wiggins agent is telling him "You don't hang big numbers, you not gonna make big money". Not every cat is built like that, Kwahi seems to not be chasing that. Good kid, good fit for the spurs, it all worked there nice. Manu is awesome thru his career for moving without the ball. It got him rich too!!In NY we got melo pushing back and quoted as saying adhering to team is "Sacrificing my game some".......as if he is somehow losing something? To quote a Tex winter as recently posted that phils greatest achievement was selling Jordan on the triangle and it turned him into a winner and mega sponser, the greatest ever!! Kobe pushed back harder as he wanted to win and fulfill his own agenda at times. He cost Lakers at least one chip by not buying in. Kobe would in some years not feel the team was good enough and he had to fill that void. Cavs are a nice collection of talent playing a high skill game. Perhaps David Blatt who was hired to coach a team without LeBron was more into the ball movement thing rather than letting his players rock and roll.

I like the idea of a culture like SAS where ball movement and a system is built. At the same time players want to be payed and not be interchangeable. Maybe what knicks were asking Shump to do was detrimental to his market value where a player at the end of his career is more inclined to still be payed market value, but know he won't have some stats in a team concept. Kind of what Iggy did going to GSW. "Be a glue guy, feed the shooters, and you will also have chances to score when the ball comes back, but you'll also get paid well to not worry about your shots".

The question looms: Does defense still win chips? Does ball movement trump individual skill? Do you follow the trend because of the talent you have, or get the talent to play winning team ball? Does the market need to promote stars? Or can the team be the star? NFL promotes its teams. NHL has few stars and promotes its teams. Baseball is far more metric oriented with less dependence on chemistry. We go to see a player or a team?

I guess when teams is winning, few yell for Steph Curry to "Pass the damn ball!!". When Melo is doing his thing, we yell, but sit down smiling when he makes the shot. when missing, we get grumpy quick.I suppose many ways to win than just one. Out west we have the two best teams in Spurs and Warriors. Warriors got Durant puts them over the top but I suppose I'll root for Spurs and team ball. Im old school that way.

I think the Warriors are a version of team ball... but they've integrated the star approach into that and tailored their system very specifically to their specific talents. Kerr has told Curry and Klay that "there are no bad shots" for them to take. Certainly not what we've heard here about KP's "cheap" three point shots. And yet, the Warriors still thrive on ball movement, cutting, passing, constant motion. It's very interesting to me what the Warriors have built.

I think they're a big favorite to win this year, but we'll see. (that said, I don't like the personalities on their team, so I wouldn't say I'm rooting for them) I would root more for the Spurs or Cavs. Can't bring myself to root for Harden's Rockets or the Celtics.

I don't see it as a philosophical struggle. I think it's clear good teams need to not only share the ball, but have a roster of two or three all-star level players to really compete for a title, as well as a strong bench. I enjoy the stylistic variations throughout the league.

I don't believe there's one overarching philosophy that wins titles - I believe style of play should be tailored to the talent you have, still team ball, but I think you build a system to suit your players. I'm not sure the Warriors could play the system they do without the very specific talents of Steph, Klay, and Draymond. I enjoy that about basketball. I think we've had a few instances of New York hiring coaches who are hell bent on installing a specific system and being inflexible. We saw it with MDA and now Phil (difference and struggle AGAIN in that Phil is NOT the coach, but it seems like he wishes he could be!). Even Larry Brown to some extent. Our best success was Woodson who looked at the talent here and invented a system on the fly and it worked. Is that the way to win a championship? Maybe not. Maybe you need these inflexible architects, hell bent on installing their vision and imposing it upon the world. I don't really know. I would say I think Popovich, while playing a team system also falls on the more - adapt it to your talent side of things. To me, that's how I'd rather play, to be honest. Pop and Kerr style. People point out Kerr played under Jackson... but he also put in plenty of time under Pop.

I (Acheem, cough cough) agree. I think perhaps we might define "Cheap 3 pt" and how that might differ from GSW's "License to kill". If you winning, its all good.If you not, thats different.As a rookie, and in watching KP I would interpret that to be that there might have been other options, but impatience (Fatigue plays a role) at that moment and a good self confidence might make it easier to bail out by hoisting a long range shot. When your 7'3 with his range that is somethink most players don't have a luxury of doing. KP is young and learning.So perhaps its easy to tell a player for one game, "Don't shoot a three" which in effect takes away any instinct to do so and seek the next option. Obviously the shot clock plays a role. Or, he might have been instructed to let the clock run out. A young player learning about "feel" would then anticipate earlier than bail with a cheap shot. Again, my interpretation!

The other thing is: "Chicken or the egg"? Do you build it to specification or coach it to what you got? Woodson had the benefit of being assistant already and came up with a scematic to fit existing personal. Where the team of late is being built to run the triangle. Imagine, getting players to play team ball and moving it being a tough task. Gee, I sound like PHil now!!!!

Knicks1248:
1. Dolan should be more involved! 2. Why would any knick fan want pick 8, when that spot has a history of producing marginal NBA taken. (He prefers pick 9th instead)

Thanks for posting this. I follow Lazenby on Twitter but I have two accounts because I forgot my login info and just signed up again. He isn't on my list of guys I follow on my phone. I have had to be away from home for two weeks unexpectedly and have only had my phone.